Le 09/10/2011 19:03, Jiří Techet a écrit : > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 17:59, Colomban Wendling > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Le 09/10/2011 16:49, Jiří Techet a écrit : >>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 15:38, Colomban Wendling >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Le 09/10/2011 14:36, Jiří Techet a écrit : >>>>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 13:55, Colomban Wendling >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>>>> * 03c3b75 (r3679) is a bit weird too, it has d3cdd27 (r3680) as parent, >>>>>> but as the SVN revision suggests, d3cdd27 is newer than it (13:53:04 vs >>>>>> 13:45:47). And I don't see from SVN log why this would be wanted. >>>>> >>>>> This is apparently my error - judging from the date I should have used >>>>> d71d352 for "merge trunk changes". I'll fix that. >>>> >>>> Great, looking forward to it. I think when this is done all is OK, so >>>> we could import it in the official repo :) >>> >>> OK, I've re-uploaded the repositories to the same locations. I've >>> fixed the incorrect merge issue and updated parents for most of the >>> re-created branches. >> >> Yep, looks great, bravo! >> >>> The only one I haven't updated is the "Create branch for configurable >>> build menu development", now commit 80d2802. There's something strange >>> - it appears the branch existed before but it was never merged into >>> trunk. Instead it was probably deleted and re-created again. If I >>> updated the parent to be the trunk only, we'd lose the history of this >>> branch because we couldn't get to the previous commits in any way. So >>> I think it's better to keep it the way it is. >> >> OK, makes sense, even though the old build-system branch was dropped >> because it was "corrupted" (according to r3939: "Removing corrupted >> branch"). > > Ah, OK, I've overlooked this. If you want to make some more changes, > create a file called "grafts" inside .git/info. Each line of this file > has format > > parent child1 child2 child3... (using commit SHAs depending on number > of children)
Isn't it rather child parent1 parent2...? Looks like it does a better job, if I understand the result correctly ^^ anyway, thanks for the tips :) Anyway I chosen to keep the previous branch as you did it so there is some more history, yet it is strange. BTW, pushed to https://github.com/geany/geany :) -- this is not yet a wide announcement because there is a few thing to tune, update & qtuff, but it's up and running. > When you're finished with your modifications, run > > git filter-branch --tag-name-filter cat -- --all > > to write it permanently into the repository. Remove the grafts file > afterwards. > >> >> I also checked the repository against my own git-svn clone as you >> suggested, and all about 60 checkpoints in the history I checked did >> match, so I'm happy to see you didn't corrupt the sources ;) > > And the remaining 5000 commits in between contain code which will > erase your hard drive completely ;-). Yep, and you're a so great mind-reader you you knew very well which commits I would check :p Cheers, Colomban _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
